UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM (UNEP) QUESTIONNAIRE UNEP Chemicals Branch, DTIE

Chemicals Branch, DTIE // Substances chimiques, DTIE 11-13, chemin des Anémones, CH - 1219 Châtelaine, Geneva, Switzerland Facsimile: +41 22 797 34 60 // E-mail: [email protected]

Response by: Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment (MDNRE) Questions on the sectors Note: These questions are for general answers and explanations. Please use the excel sheets for data submission.

Questionnaire – coal combustion Note: These questions are for general answers and explanations. Please use the excel sheets for detailed data submission. Sector description: Coal fired power plants. Production of electricity and heat, industrial and public utilities. 1. What is the total amount of coal consumed annually (please specify year)? 37,936,573 tons were consumed in 2005 for the coal-fired electric generating units (EGU) and commercial/industrial boiler sector, per the 2005 activity data reported to the Michigan Air Emission Reporting System (MAERS).

2. What is the origin and quality of the coal? (Anthracite, Bituminous, Sub bituminous, Lignite, specify chloride content and mercury content wherever possible). Only bituminous and subbituminous coal is burned in Michigan, anthracite coal and lignite coal are not burned in Michigan. As part of the effort to assist EPA in making its regulatory determination whether it was appropriate and necessary to regulate emissions of HAPs by electric utility steam generating units, as required by Section 112(n)(1)(A) of the CAAA, the EPA conducted its first information collection request (ICR) in 1999. The purpose of the ICR was to determine the amount and variability of mercury in coal used in 1999, as well as targeted measurement of mercury emissions from specific facilities including two Michigan facilities (DTE Energy’s St. Clair plant and We Energies Presque Isle). For the 1999 ICR results, see: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/combust/utiltox/utoxpg.html#ICR According to EPA’s 1999 ICR the mercury concentration range for bituminous coal was 0.01-0.45 ppm and for sub-bituminous coal type 0.02-0.36 ppm.

1

Because of the federal Clean Air Mercury Rule vacature, EPA is currently conducting a second ICR. The data is not yet available, but is expected fall 2010. This data will be used for the development of a federal utility MACT (maximum achievable control technology) standard for all hazardous air pollutants, including mercury to be completed by November 16, 2011.

3. What are the projected changes in energy (electricity and heat) production based on coal between now and 2020 and 2050? If no new plants are built (which means probably no shutdowns) then no change is projected for 2020. For 2050, this is unknown because MDNRE does not make projections that far out and Michigan has coal-fired power plants that are currently operating beyond 50 years. Additionally, the Michigan Renewable Energy and Efficiency Act requires 10% renewable energy by 2015.

4. What is the total energy (heat and electricity) production, based coal in utility and industrial boilers? A Michigan stakeholder workgroup developed a report titled, “Michigan’s Mercury Electric Utility Workgroup – Final Report on Mercury Emissions from Coal-Fired Power Plants” June 20, 2005 and can be accessed at: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-aqd-air-aqe-mercury-report_272074_7.pdf This report contains valuable information for this sector, most of which is still current.

5. What is the total number of coal fired power plants in utility and industry sectors? Based on the Utility report cited above in question #4, the report states that there are 21 coal-fired electric utility power plants operating in Michigan, one however has not been in operation since 2002 and is not expected to start up again. The report outlines the specific electric generating unit (EGU) information in Tables 7 and 8. The units are owned and operated by a combination of investor and municipal owned, independent producers and a campus based cogeneration plant. In 2005, there were 30 coal-fired industrial/commercial boilers operating.

6. What are the broad technical characteristics of the power plants (fluidized bed, powder, etc.) (See utility report link mentioned in # 4 above.) 7. What is the status of air pollution emission control in use in the coal fired power plants? Percentage of plants/capacity with cyclones, ESP, bag filters, particle scrubbers, SO2 scrubber, limestone injection, NOx-reduction, Cyclones - 0% of the generating capacity Electrostatic Precipitators (ESPs) - 11,508 MW, 94% of the generating capacity Bag filters - 730 MW, 6% of the generating capacity Particle scrubbers - 0% of the generating capacity SO2 scrubbers - 1802 MW, 15% of the generating capacity

2

Limestone injection - 32.5 MW, 0.3% of the generating capacity NOx reduction - low-NOx burners on almost all generation, selective catalytic reduction (SCRs) - 4,256 MW, 35% of the generating capacity All numbers are approximate

8. What are the current (2005 or more recent) emissions of SO2, NOx, particles, CO2 and mercury from the sector? Based on the 2005 MAERS data, ~3,300 lbs/year of mercury are emitted (for both utility and industrial/commercial coal fired boilers.) Also, for both utility and industrial/commercial coal fired boilers: NOx: 122,099 tons PM10: 5608 tons (4069 tons PM10-FIL, 1539 tons PM10-PRI) PM2.5: 2261 tons (1597 tons PM25FIL, 664 tons PM25PRI) SO2: 368,815 tons

9. Are there plans for increased air pollution control based on national legislation or international conventions? Please specify plans with information on which pollutants will be controlled and by which technologies. Specify which legislation or international agreement (if applicable) Michigan’s Governor Granholm charged the MDNRE to develop rules to control 90% of the mercury emissions from coal-fired EGUs by 2015. These rules were developed by a stakeholder workgroup and went into effect October 16, 2009. Michigan’s state rule requires mercury reductions from coal-fired electric generating units starting January 1, 2015. The basic components include three compliance options: 1. A minimum of 90% reduction* from baseline input mercury levels or an output-based emission standard of 0.008 lb/GW-hr*. 2. A multi-pollutant compliance demonstration project which must achieve 75% reduction* from baseline input mercury levels along with significant reductions in nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. 3. Very Low Mass Emitting (VLME) unit that is limited to 9 pounds of mercury per 12month rolling time period with an alternative compliance demonstration project. * 12-month rolling average basis. The rules include the compliance options, technical and economic exceptions, monitoring, testing, record keeping, and implementation. Michigan’s mercury rules - Part 15, Part 10, and Part 11 can be found at: http://www.deq.state.mi.us/apcrats/toc_collapsible_2.shtml

10. Are there plans to modernize the sector to achieve a higher degree of energy efficiency? This would require new plants to be constructed and currently one new permit for a new 930 MW unit has been issued (environmental groups opposing issuance of the permit

3

filed suit against MDNRE regarding the permitting of the proposed facility). Permits applications for new units at two other facilities are still pending.

11. What are the projected emissions of carbon dioxide and other air pollutants (SO2, NOx, PM) 2020 and 2050? Unknown at this time. 12. What are the current (2005 or later) estimated mercury emissions from the sector and what are the projected emissions 2020 and 2050? For 2005, the estimates for coal-fired EGUs are estimated at ~ 3,000 lbs/year and for coal-fired industrial/commercial boilers are estimated to emit ~300 lbs/year for 2005. For 2020, when Michigan's new mercury rule will be in effect, then projections are 700 to 800 pounds per year for the coal-fired EGUs. For 2050, this is too far out to project.

MDNRE will adopt the federal standard for Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Boilers that are currently being developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 13. Please provide information on any case studies where mercury emissions have been monitored. There have been significant mercury emissions testing at coal-fired EGUs in Michigan over the last several years. One study in 2002 was conducted in Hillsdale County at Michigan South Central Power Agency and was published by the Canada Geological Survey (Goodarzi, et al. 2002). Another study was conducted as part of DOE NETL’s project, “Advanced Utility Mercury-Sorbent Field-Testing Program” in 2004. This study was presented at the “Combined Power Plant Air Pollutant Control Mega Symposium in Washington, DC 8/30/2004-9/2/2004 by McCoy, M. et al. This study was also published by Jones, et al. 2007). The most extensive case study located in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula involved extensive testing and retrofits for mercury controls funded, in part, by the U.S. Department of Energy was conducted at the We Energies Presque Isle Power Plant in Marquette, Michigan. Over 90% control of mercury was achieved and over 70% control of SO2. The report, “Toxecon Retrofit for Mercury and Multi-Pollutant Control on Three 90-MW Coal-Fired Boilers” can be accessed at: http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/cctc/ccpi/pubs/WE%20Final%20Proj ect%20Report%2041766TPRFG093009.pdf

Questionnaire – cement production Note: These questions are for general answers and explanations. Please use the excel sheets for data submission. Sector description: Cement production facilities. 1. What is the total annual capacity of the cement production sector?

4

4.22 million short tons of clinker per year (based on 2002-2003 years) (this is only for the two currently operating cement plants).

2. How is production expected to change between now and 2020 and 2050? MDNRE will adopt the federal MACT standard for cement kilns that is expected to reduce mercury emissions significantly. One facility is currently obtaining permits for a variety of raw material and fuel substitutes including old CKD from on-site, old landfill material from on-site, asphalt shingles, plastics, and refractory & recycled glass.

3. What is the total number of cement production plants? For the 2005 inventory, three cement plants were operating in Michigan. In 2009 one ceased operation so currently only two plants are in operation in Michigan.

4. What are the main fuel types and which percentage is used? For one plant there is a 50/50 mixture of coal and petcoke.

5. What is the total amount of coal consumed annually (please specify year)? For one plant the amount of coal consumed annually is 221,00 tons per year and for petcoke 221,000 tons per year. The other plant consumes 65,355 tons and 65,180 tons annually.

6. What is the origin and quality of the coal? (Anthracite, Bituminous, Sub bituminous) The coal burned is powder river basin at one facility which is a subbituminous coal from Montana and Wyoming that contains 8500 btu/lb with low SO2. The other facility mines limestone, shale, and sand on-site. This facility also has old CKD and an old city landfill on-site and is conditionally permitted to use as raw materials.

7. Are other fuel types used (waste, tires etc)? One facility was permitted to burn hazardous waste, but this facility no longer burns hazardous waste, although this facility does burn plastics.

8. What is the total amount of other fuel consumed annually (please specify year)? For one plant the amount of coal consumed annually is 221,000 tons per year and for petcoke 221,000 tons per year.

9. What is the total amount of limestone consumed annually (please specify year)?

5

For one facility the amount of limestone was 3.8 million tons per year (for 2002-2003 years).

10. What is the origin and quality of the limestone? Mercury content? Which other raw material are used (slag etc)? For one facility, the limestone is obtained from a quarry located on-site at the facility. The limestone throughput is 3.8 million tons per year and the flyash throughput is 250,000 tons per year (for 2002-2003 years). For this same facility the mercury content in coal was 0.1 mg/kg and 0.63 mg/kg in flyash (based on 2006 data and an approximate feed rate of 130 tons per hour). A second facility tested their petcoke at 5.93 ng/g, the limit in the permit if for no more than 69 ng/g.

11. What are the technical characteristics of the cement plants (dry kiln, wet kiln, preheater/pre-calciner) One operates five long dry process kilns and second facility operates a dry process kiln with low NOx in-line calciner (for the two currently operating). 12. What is the status for air pollution emission control? Percentage of plants/capacity with cyclones, ESP, bag filters, particle scrubbers, SO2 scrubber, limestone injection, NOx reduction. One facility operates with a fabric filter dust collectors and another facility operates with a fabric filter dust collector on the main stack, an ESB on a bypass stack and is equipped with a selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) in the summer (however is currently not operating). 13. What are the current (2005 or more recent) emissions of SO2, NOx, particles, CO2 and mercury from the sector? For the cement plant industry (cement manufacturing), 2005: NOx: 14805 tons PM10: 2119 tons (2061 tons PM10-FIL, 58 tons PM10-PRI) PM2.5-FIL: 145 tons SO2: 23030 tons For 2005, the mercury emissions estimated for the three plants was between 600-1,000 lbs/year.

14. Are there plans for increased air pollution control based on national legislation or international conventions? Please specify plans with information on which pollutants will be controlled and by which technologies. Specify which specific legislation or international agreement (if applicable) MDNRE will adopt the federal cement plant MACT regulation when finalized.

6

15. What are the projected changes in the sector between now and 2020 or 2050? Unknown at this time. 16. What are the projected emissions of carbon dioxide and other air pollutants (SO2, NOx, PM) 2020 and 2050? Unknown at this time. 17. What are the current (2005 or later) mercury emissions from the sector and what are the projected emissions for 2020 and 2050? See answer to number 13 above and projections are not possible at this time.

18. Please provide information on any case studies where mercury emissions have been monitored. 19. Please provide any available information on investment and running costs for emission control of mercury. 20. Please provide information on any case studies where mercury emissions have been monitored.

Questionnaire – Non ferrous metal production Note: These questions are for general answers and explanations. Please use the excel sheets for data submission. Sector description: Smelters for Copper, Zinc, Lead, Gold, Mercury. There are currently no smelters operating in the state of Michigan. A copper smelter operating in Michigan’s upper peninsula and ceased operation in 1995; when operating it was estimated to emit approximately 1,200 lbs/year of mercury.

1. What is the total annual capacity of the non ferrous metal production (per metal)? 2. What is the total number of smelters? 3. What is the origin and composition (including mercury content) of the main ores? 4. What are the total amounts used of the different ores? 5. Describe the main processes used for the different ores. E.g. roasting. pyrometallurgy, electrowinning, etc. 6. What is the total amount of coal used in pyrometallurgy processes annually (please specify year)? 7. What is the origin and quality of coal used (Anthracite, Sub bituminous, Bituminous, Lignite), and chloride content, mercury content? 8. What is the status for air pollution emission control? Percentage of plants/capacity with cyclones, ESP, bag filters, particle scrubbers, SO2 scrubber, limestone injection, NOx - reduction.

7

9. What are the current (2005 or more recent) emissions of SO2, NOx, particles, CO2 and mercury from the sector? 10. What are the expected changes in production between now and 2020 and 2050? 11.Are there plans for increased air pollution control based on national legislation or international conventions? Please specify plans with information on which pollutants will be controlled and by which technologies. Specify which specific legislation or international agreement (if applicable) 12.Are there plans for modernization of sector (energy saving) between now and 2020 or 2050? 13. What are the projected emissions of carbon dioxide and other air pollutants (SO2, NOx, PM) in 2020 and 2050? 14. What are the current (2005 or later) mercury emissions from the sector and what are the projected emissions in 2020 and 2050? 15. Please provide information on any case studies where mercury emissions have been monitored. 16. Please provide any available information on investment and running costs for emission control of mercury.

Questionnaire – Waste incineration Note: These questions are for general answers and explanations. Please use the excel sheets for data submission. Sector description: Medium to large scale waste incineration facilities 1. What is the fraction and total amount of household waste incinerated? MDNRE estimates that the amount of municipal waste incinerated in the state of Michigan is approximately 10%.

2. What is the total number of household waste incinerators? Three. 3. What are the technical characteristics of the household waste incinerator plants? There are three municipal waste (household waste) incineration facilities in the State of Michigan. The largest scale waste incineration facility is the Greater Detroit Resource Recovery Facility located at 5700 Russell Street in Detroit, County of Wayne, next to the City of Detroit Public Works Yard. The facility converts incoming municipal solid waste (MSW) into a processed-refuse derived fuel (RDF) to generate steam and electricity for sale. The facility consists of an MSW processing facility to produce RDF, three RDF traveling stoker grates waterwall boilers, an electrical generator with a 68 megawatts nameplate

8

capacity, and associated support equipment. Each boiler is equipped with a baghouse, a dry scrubber, a carbon injection system, and a selective non catalytic reaction system. The facility is permitted to process 20,000 tons per week and 1,043,000 tons per year of MSW. The 2nd largest facility is the Kent County Waste To Energy Facility located on the Grand River just southwest of downtown Grand Rapids. A nominal 625 ton per day (4,375 tons per week and 228,125 tons per year) waste to energy facility firing municipal solid waste and natural gas. Each unit is rated at 312.5 tons per day MSW at a higher heating value (hhv) of 4,800 Btu/lb., and 125 MMBtu per hour. Two identical municipal solid waste mass burn waterwall boilers can be co-fired with natural gas. The boilers produce steam for process use, export and/or for electrical generation. Each boiler is equipped with a baghouse, a dry scrubber, a carbon injection system, and a selective non catalytic reaction system.

The Jackson County Resource Recovery Facility is located on the north side of Jackson County adjacent to the Southern Michigan State Prison. The resource recovery facility supplies electricity and steam heat to the prison complex. Up to 200 tons per day (1,400 per week and 73,000 tons per year) of locally generated municipal waste is used as the primary fuel source. The facility operates two one hundred ton per day incinerators, which heat boilers to generate steam and power turbine generators. Natural gas is used to bring the burn chambers up to the required temperature at start up and as a backup to maintain the required temperature in the burn chamber if a problem occurs. The emissions from each unit are controlled with a dry acid gas scrubber, carbon injection and a fabric filter collector.

4. What is the average mercury content in household waste? The amount of mercury used for estimation of volatilization of mercury during solid waste collection and processing that MDNRE has utilized is 0.004 lbs of mercury per ton of solid waste (Van Veizen, et. al, 2002).

5. What are the mercury emissions from household waste incineration? For 2005, the estimate from Michigan’s three municipal waste incinerators was approximately 52 lbs per year.

6. What is the fraction and total amount of industrial waste incinerated? The municipal waste incinerators are not allowed to burn industrial waste. Therefore, there is no fraction of industrial waste incinerated in municipal waste incineration facilities. Some company’s burn waste in their boilers that they generate; however, this waste is not considered industrial waste.

7. What is the total number of industrial waste incinerators? 8. What are the technical characteristics of the industrial waste incinerator plants? 9. What is the average mercury content in the industrial waste? 10. What are the mercury emissions from industrial waste incinerated?

9

11. What is the fraction and total amount of hazardous and medical waste incinerated? According to facility information for the currently operating hazardous waste incinerator, 44,409 tons of hazardous waste was managed.

12. What is the total number of hazardous and medical waste incinerators? For 2005, there was one medical waste incinerator operating which has since ceased operation. For 2005, two hazardous waste incinerators were operating.

13. What is the technical characterization of the hazardous and medical waste incinerator plants? Currently, Michigan has only one hazardous waste incinerator. It has a rotary kiln primary combustion chamber and a secondary combustion chamber. The maximum heat input rating from waste is 130 MMBTU/hour. The air pollution control train consists of urea injection (to control nitrogen oxides emission), a quench tower, a condensing scrubber, a venturi scrubber, a demister/chlorine scrubber, and a bank of ionizing wet scrubbers. The unit is capable of handling a wide range of hazardous wastes. The only hazardous wastes specifically excluded from the unit are those containing PCBs at 50 ppm or greater and the "dioxin-listed" hazardous wastes under US and Michigan law (codes F020, F021, F022, F023, F026, and F027). The unit is designed to provide 99.999% destruction and removal of hazardous waste constituents, and has demonstrated this capability. It can receive solid, liquid, and gaseous feed streams containing hazardous waste. The unit can receive solid streams in bulk and container forms. Pumpable/liquid and gaseous streams can be introduced to the unit in the secondary chamber.

14. What is the average mercury content in the hazardous and medical waste? Unknown 15. What are the mercury emissions from hazardous and medical waste incineration? For 2005, the one medical waste incinerator was estimated to emit approximately 6 lbs per year and the two hazardous waste incinerators were estimated to emit approximately 27 lbs per year.

16. What is the status for air pollution emission control? Percentage of plants/capacity with cyclones, ESP, bag filters, particle scrubbers, SO2 scrubber, limestone injection, NOx reduction. (See answers to questions number three and thirteen above.)

10

17. What are the current (2005 or more recent) emissions of SO2, NOx, particles, and mercury from the sector? The SO2, NOx and particulate emissions are for 2005 from MAERS for municipal, medical and hazardous incinerators operating in Michigan in 2005, note sewage sludge incinerators were not included, but do operate in Michigan). SO2, 187 tons NOx, 1358 tons PM10, 14 tons (13 tons PM10-FIL, 1 ton PM10-PRI) PM2.5-FIL, 0 tons Mercury, 0.04 tons (84.71 lbs)

18. What are the expected changes in incineration between now and 2020 and 2050? Unknown 19. Are there plans for increased air pollution control based on national legislation or international conventions? Please specify plans if possible with information on which pollutant will be controlled and by which technologies. 20. Are there plans for modernization of sector until 2020 or 2050? 21. What are the projected emissions of mercury and air pollutants 2020 and 2050? 22. Please provide information on any case studies where mercury emissions have been monitored. 23. Please provide any available information on investment and running costs for emission control of mercury. 24. Please provide information on any case studies where mercury emissions have been monitored

11

References Cited Goodarzi, F., Peel, W.P., Huggins, F.E., Brown, J.R., Charland, J.P., Percival, J. 2002. Chemical and mineralogical characteristics of milled coal, ashes and stack-emitted material from unit no. 5. battle river coal-fired power station, Alberta, Canada. Canada Geological Survey – bulletin 570. p. 155. Jones, A.P., Hoffmann, J.W., Smith, D.N., Feeley, III, T.J., and Murphy, J.T. 2007. DOE/NETL’s phase ii mercury control technology field testing program: preliminary economic analysis of activated carbon injection. Environ. Sci. Technol. 41(4):1365-1371. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es0617340 Van Veizen, Daniel, Langenkamp, Heinrich & Georg Herb. 2002. Review: Mercury in waste incineration. Waste Manage Res:20, p556-568.

Submitted by: Joy Taylor Morgan, MDNRE 4-15-10 (updated 4-28-10) [email protected]

12